or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Watch Appreciation Thread - Page 923

post #13831 of 38526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

 

Yes, I believe that the moonphase in some Pateks and Langes are said to be accurate for upto roughly 120 years.  But in any event, I believe as you suggest they are also more precise and divide the cycle into a very exact number rather than just rounding it to 29 days.  

 

However, I do wonder what they mean by it not requiring any adjustment for 100+ years, and if that is simply based on a hypothetical using their mathematical forumals and going with an assumption that the watch will be continuously worn and powered for all of those years.  Realistically, most people will take the watch off at some point and it will lose power and have to be reset.  In addition, even if someone wore it non-stop after several years it would need to go in for a service and it might get a little fine tuning. 

The owner would not have to make any corrections for short or long months or even leap years for about 120 years. Tried to find the exact time, but was unable. Besides this may vary depending on watch but yes we could be talking about as long as 120 years.

 

But of course this means it would have to run continuously. This is why they have watch winders, however as you pointed out there would be times the watch would need to go in for a service, and of course this would be one time when it would have to be reset and re-wound. The power reserve may not last long enough until it is actually delivered. But the watch would have been stopped when it was disassembled during the service regardless.

 

But still a marvel none the less.

post #13832 of 38526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Naked Economist View Post

Need to purchase my first real time piece.

 

I am thinking of getting a silver bracelet, which I can always change to leather later.

 

The watch has to be automatic too.

 

I came up with these choices, they are all under my £900 budget.

 

Which one do you prefer? I would be wearing them with a suit and casually.

 

http://www.goldsmiths.co.uk/product/longines-sport-conquest-gents-watch-l36764766

 

http://www.goldsmiths.co.uk/product/longines-flagship-gents-watch-l47744126

 

http://www.goldsmiths.co.uk/product/longines-sport-hydroconquest-gents-watch-l36424566

 

I am too indecisive, so any help would be greatly appreciated. For an answer that really helps me out, I will send you a random gift in the mail.

Of the watches you have suggested, I liked the one at the top of your list and the diving watch with the rotating bezel.  I didn't care for the middle selection.   The one in the middle with the smaller bracelet links didn't look quite as clean and masculine as the first and third watches.  They probably all use the same ETA based movement, so the quality of the movements is probably the same for each.

 

I think you have to determine whether you will wear the watch more casually or more frequently with suits.  The listing at the top of your choices is a very clean versatile design.  I can see it easily being worn with suits or casual clothing.  The last choice, the diving watch with black bezel, is definitely more of a sports watch and better suited for wearing casual clothing.  You can wear it with a suit, afterall people wear Rolex Submariners with suits, so its the same idea.  Its just not quite as dressy looking to wear it with a suit.  To some degree you may have to ask yourself if you are comfortable wearing a sports watch with a suit, or do you want something that can be universally worn with suits and casual clothing.

 

You may also want to consider looking at vintage Longines, Gruens, or maybe even an Omega.  Going vintage will give you some interesting choices, and it will often make certain you are wearing a watch that you won't frequently see on other peoples wrists.  Although, I think you will find many of their watches may seem more delicate than a modern watch, unless say you look for something like a pre-owned stainless steel automatic Omega Constellation from say the late 80s early 1990s.  They were not as bulkie as they are today, but they could be worn everyday and looked good with suits or casual clothes.  Good luck with your search.  Take you time, the hunt is part of the fun!

post #13833 of 38526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

Of the watches you have suggested, I liked the one at the top of your list and the diving watch with the rotating bezel.  I didn't care for the middle selection.   The one in the middle with the smaller bracelet links didn't look quite as clean and masculine as the first and third watches.  They probably all use the same ETA based movement, so the quality of the movements is probably the same for each.

 

I think you have to determine whether you will wear the watch more casually or more frequently with suits.  The listing at the top of your choices is a very clean versatile design.  I can see it easily being worn with suits or casual clothing.  The last choice, the diving watch with black bezel, is definitely more of a sports watch and better suited for wearing casual clothing.  You can wear it with a suit, afterall people wear Rolex Submariners with suits, so its the same idea.  Its just not quite as dressy looking to wear it with a suit.  To some degree you may have to ask yourself if you are comfortable wearing a sports watch with a suit, or do you want something that can be universally worn with suits and casual clothing.

 

 

 

You may also want to consider looking at vintage Longines, Gruens, or maybe even an Omega.  Going vintage will give you some interesting choices, and it will often make certain you are wearing a watch that you won't frequently see on other peoples wrists.  Although, I think you will find many of their watches may seem more delicate than a modern watch, unless say you look for something like a pre-owned stainless steel automatic Omega Constellation from say the late 80s early 1990s.  They were not as bulkie as they are today, but they could be worn everyday and looked good with suits or casual clothes.  Good luck with your search.  Take you time, the hunt is part of the fun!

I think this is an excellent suggestion. I also would recomend you consider getting a good quality vintage as well. However do make sure you check on service history when doing so. The cost of a service could easily make you go above your budget. Have a reputable watchmaker take a look at it before buying one.

post #13834 of 38526
Quote:
Originally Posted by dddrees View Post

The owner would not have to make any corrections for short or long months or even leap years for about 120 years. Tried to find the exact time, but was unable. Besides this may vary depending on watch but yes we could be talking about as long as 120 years.

 

Just checked one of my AP catalogues its for model year 2011, and for 2 of the more complicated pieces that had moonphase displays (one being their Equation of Time) , they stated it would require an adjustment once every 122 years.  Obviously, it could vary from model to model, or brand to brand. 

 

I suppose the time required for adjustment is a cool theoretical fact, that only one of our ancestors will be able to verify.  Still its very cool, and I think a phase of the moon display always adds some color and beauty to a watch. 

post #13835 of 38526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kai View Post

My latest watch in my Japan collection: Seiko SARN003 (Retrograde GMT)
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 


 Cool watch !  Hope you are enjoying it.

post #13836 of 38526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

Just checked one of my AP catalogues its for model year 2011, and for 2 of the more complicated pieces that had moonphase displays (one being their Equation of Time) , they stated it would require an adjustment once every 122 years.  Obviously, it could vary from model to model, or brand to brand. 

I suppose the time required for adjustment is a cool theoretical fact, that only one of our ancestors will be able to verify.  Still its very cool, and I think a phase of the moon display always adds some color and beauty to a watch. 

i think i recall one of the smaller boutique brants, maybe dewitt or debethune, that had one that was said to be accurate for over 500 years. i could be totally misremembering though.
post #13837 of 38526

I chose to use my introduction post for the watch thread because of my love of watches.

 

Hopefully I'm not posting in the wrong thread... all the Pateks and Rolexs are intimidating.

 

Took the day off from work so didn't get out much. Wore my IWC Mark XVI today...

 

Fun fact: None of my watches ever have the correct date because I'm too lazy to set them.

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post


i think i recall one of the smaller boutique brants, maybe dewitt or debethune, that had one that was said to be accurate for over 500 years. i could be totally misremembering though.

 

I was talking to someone earlier in the month about their IWC Perpetual and I THINK he mentioned it was accurate for ~400 years.

 

Edit: http://people.timezone.com/library/horologium/horologium0015

post #13838 of 38526
Quote:
Originally Posted by MuZI View Post

I chose to use my introduction post for the watch thread because of my love of watches.

Hopefully I'm not posting in the wrong thread... all the Pateks and Rolexs are intimidating.

Took the day off from work so didn't get out much. Wore my IWC Mark XVI today...

Fun fact: None of my watches ever have the correct date because I'm too lazy to set them. Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)


I was talking to someone earlier in the month about their IWC Perpetual and I THINK he mentioned it was accurate for ~400 years.

Edit: http://people.timezone.com/library/horologium/horologium0015

great watch, and great way to get started posting.

thanks for the link. i read the IWC article, that also has an accuracy up to 122 years.

i did find this tho, and it was not what i was thinking of. boggles the mind.

http://www.hodinkee.com/2011/10/17/a-week-on-the-wrist-the-ochs-and-junior-selene-tinta-moonpha.html

Quote:
The brainchild of MIH watch creator, Ulysse Nardin Freak designer, and Zenith Captain Winsor inspiration Ludwig Oechslin, Ochs and Junior is a small batch independent watch company that takes on a playful and practical tone. Its watches are beautiful and unpretentious, void of branding.

The brilliant Oechslin, with the brand's Tinta line of watches, has made incredibly complicated pieces, all based on an ETA-2824 movement, including the watch Felix has reviewed here, the Selene Tinta. This moonphase will remain accurate for 3478.27 years before needing adjustment - more precise than any moonphase wristwatch in history, and it will cost (much) less than your average Rolex Daytona.
post #13839 of 38526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

Very nice.  Love the case and dial.
Thanks.  If you found a Tank XL for only $5K and not a standard Tank, that was a steal !  I've have gotten unsoliticted emails to buy it, from people that have seen me post pix of it on another site. 
yes, tank xl cpcp. for 5k. sad i passed.
post #13840 of 38526
For perpetual calendars, don't they just have to be accurate to 4 years only to account for leap years? Or am I missing something..
post #13841 of 38526
Quote:
Originally Posted by aleksandr View Post

For perpetual calendars, don't they just have to be accurate to 4 years only to account for leap years? Or am I missing something..

Here's what I've found so far:

 

What's a Perpetual Calendar? How is it different from an Annual Calendar or Triple-Date?

A perpetual calendar is the most developed form of the simple date window on a typical watch. It keeps track of date, day-of-the-week, (sometimes weeks), months, year, leap years, and sometimes even centuries. Because of the relatively complex rules governing the Gregorian calendar, including the varying lengths of months, and leap years every four years, a typical perpetual calendar has wheels turning from several times per second (e.g. balance wheel) all the way to once every four years. Because of the complexity of the Gregorian calendar, some perpetual calendars will require an experienced watchmaker open the watch to make an adjustment at AD 2100, or later (assuming that an experienced watchmaker still exists then).

Some less complex calendars are also available:

  • Semi-perpetual calendars (e.g. the Breitling Montbrilliant 1461), which requires an adjustment on leap year day only.
  • annual calendars (of which the Patek Philippe 5035 is an outstanding example), which only require a user adjustment once every February
  • "triple date" calendars, which contain month, day, and date - but need to be manually advanced at the end of each (short) month

Some would say that the inconvenience in resetting the date on a true perpetual calendar is the main reason for the existence of the watch winder industry. :-)

post #13842 of 38526

 

This is the one I'm wearing today.

post #13843 of 38526
Quote:
Originally Posted by aleksandr View Post

For perpetual calendars, don't they just have to be accurate to 4 years only to account for leap years? Or am I missing something..

This is what I found on Wikipedia:

 

The Gregorian calendar, also called the Western calendar and the Christian calendar, is the internationally accepted civil calendar.[1][2][3] It was introduced by Pope Gregory XIII, after whom the calendar was named, by a decree signed on 24 February 1582; the decree, a papal bull, is known by its opening words, Inter gravissimas.[4] The reformed calendar was adopted later that year by a handful of countries, with other countries adopting it over the following centuries.

The motivation for the Gregorian reform was that the Julian calendar assumes that the time between vernal equinoxes is 365.25 days, when in fact it is presently almost exactly 11 minutes shorter. The discrepancy accumulates at the rate of about three days every four centuries, resulting in the equinox being on March 11 (a cumulative error of about 10 days since Roman times), and moving steadily earlier in the Julian calendar, at the time of the Gregorian reform. Because the spring equinox was tied to the celebration of Easter, the Roman Catholic Church considered this steady movement in the date of the equinox undesirable.

The Gregorian calendar reform contained two parts: a reform of the Julian calendar as used prior to Pope Gregory's time and a reform of the lunar cycle used by the Church, with the Julian calendar, to calculate the date of Easter. The reform was a modification of a proposal made by the Calabrian doctor Aloysius Lilius (or Lilio).[5] Lilius' proposal included reducing the number of leap years in four centuries from 100 to 97, by making 3 out of 4 centurial years common instead of leap years: this part of the proposal had been suggested before by, among others, Pietro Pitati. Lilio also produced an original and practical scheme for adjusting the epacts of the moon when calculating the annual date of Easter, solving a long-standing obstacle to calendar reform.

The Gregorian calendar thus modified the Julian calendar's regular cycle of leap years, years exactly divisible by four,[6] including all centurial years, as follows:

Every year that is exactly divisible by four is a leap year, except for years that are exactly divisible by 100; the centurial years that are exactly divisible by 400 are still leap years. For example, the year 1900 is not a leap year; the year 2000 is a leap year.[7]

In addition to the change in the mean length of the calendar year from 365.25 days (365 days 6 hours) to 365.2425 days (365 days 5 hours 49 minutes 12 seconds), a reduction of 10 minutes 48 seconds per year, the Gregorian calendar reform also dealt with the accumulated difference between these lengths. Between AD 325 (when the First Council of Nicaea was held, and the vernal equinox occurred approximately 21 March), and the time of Pope Gregory's bull in 1582, the vernal equinox had moved backward in the calendar, until it was occurring on about 11 March, 10 days earlier. The Gregorian calendar therefore began by skipping 10 calendar days, to restore March 21 as the date of the vernal equinox.

Because of the Protestant Reformation, however, many Western European countries did not initially follow the Gregorian reform, and maintained their old-style systems. Eventually other countries followed the reform for the sake of consistency, but by the time the last adherents of the Julian calendar in Eastern Europe (Russia and Greece) changed to the Gregorian system in the 20th century, they had to drop 13 days from their calendars, due to the additional difference between the two calendars accumulated after 1582.

The Gregorian calendar continued the previous year-numbering system (Anno Domini), which counts years from the traditional date of the nativity, originally calculated in the 6th century and in use in much of Europe by the High Middle Ages. This year-numbering system, now also called Common Era, is the predominant international standard today. [8]

 

 

The Gregorian calendar is an arithmetical calendar potentially extending over an infinite time scale. It consists of a series of contiguous calendar years identified by consecutive year numbers.[9] It is a solar calendar and counts days as the basic unit of time, grouping them into years of 365 or 366 days; and repeats completely every 146,097 days, which fill 400 years, and which also happens to be 20,871 seven-day weeks.[10][11]

Of these 400 years, 303 common years have 365 days and 97 leap years have 366 days. This yields a calendar mean year of exactly 365+97/400 days = 365.2425 days = 365 days, 5 hours, 49 minutes and 12 seconds. The same result is obtained by summing the fractional parts implied by the rule: 365 + 141100 + 1400 = 365 + 0.25 − 0.01 + 0.0025 = 365.2425

A Gregorian year is divided into twelve months:

 

 

Although the month length pattern seems irregular, it can be represented by the arithmetic expression L = 30 + { [ M + floor(M/8) ] MOD 2 }, where L is the month length in days and M is the month number 1 to 12. The expression is valid for all 12 months, but for M = 2 (February) adjust by subtracting 2 and then if it is a leap year add 1.

For a better representation, consider Zeller's Congruence.

A calendar date is fully specified by the year (numbered by some scheme beyond the scope of the calendar itself), the month (identified by name or number), and the day of the month (numbered sequentially starting at 1).

Leap years add a 29th day to February, which normally has 28 days. The essential ongoing differentiating feature of the Gregorian calendar, as distinct from the Julian calendar with a leap day every four years, is that the Gregorian omits 3 leap days every 400 years. This difference would have been more noticeable in modern memory were it not that the year 2000 was a leap year in both the Julian and Gregorian calendar systems.

The intercalary day in a leap year is known as a leap day. Since Roman times 24 February (bissextile) was counted as the leap day,[12][13] but now 29 February is regarded as the leap day in most countries.

Although the calendar year runs from 1 January to 31 December, sometimes year numbers were based on a different starting point within the calendar. Confusingly, the term "Anno Domini" is not specific on this point, and actually refers to a family of year numbering systems with different starting points for the years.

 

 

 

post #13844 of 38526
ddd, nice job on explaining the complexity of the perp cal, also, nice patek. how big is your collection?
post #13845 of 38526
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

ddd, nice job on explaining the complexity of the perp cal, also, nice patek. how big is your collection?

Thanks, but I just copied some info from a couple of different soures.

 

Not that large, just a few nice watches that I really really like.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread